The Ethics of Job

Discrimination
Chapter 7
Business Ethics
Manuel G. Velasquez
JOB DISCRIMINATION: ITS
NATURE
Discrimination is the wrongful act of distinguishing illicitly among people not on the
basis of individual merit, but on the basis of prejudice or some other invidious or
morally reprehensible attitude.
The root meaning of the term discriminate is “to distinguish one object from
another,” a morally neutral and not necessarily wrongful activity.
However, in modern usage, the term is not morally neutral; it is usually intended to
refer to the wrongful act of distinguishing illicitly among people not on the basis of
individual merit, but on the basis of prejudice or some other invidious or morally
reprehensible attitude.
Forms of Discrimination: Intentional
and Institutional Aspects
A helpful framework for analyzing different forms of discrimination can be constructed
by distinguishing the extent to which a discriminatory act is intentional and isolated (or
non-institutionalized) and the extent to which it is unintentional and institutionalized.
First, a discriminatory act may be part of the isolated (non-institutionalized) behavior
of a single individual who intentionally and knowingly discriminates out of personal
prejudice.
Second, a discriminatory act may be part of the routine behavior of an institutionalized
group, which intentionally and knowingly discriminates out of personal prejudices of
its members.
Third, an act of discrimination may be part of the isolated (non-institutionalized)
behavior of a single individual who unintentionally and unknowingly discriminates
against someone because the individual unthinkingly adopts the traditional practices
and stereotypes of the surrounding society.
Forms of Discrimination: Intentional
and Institutional Aspects
Affirmative action program is a program designed to ensure the proportion of
minorities within an organization matches their proportion in the available workforce.
Discrimination and law:
• Civil Rights Act of 1964: made it illegal to make hiring, firing, or compensation
decisions on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin
• Executive Order 11246: required companies doing business with the federal
government to take steps to redress racial imbalance in workforce
• Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972: gave EEOC increased power to
combat “underutilization” and to require affirmative action programs
DISCRIMINATION: ITS EXTENT
Three kinds of comparisons can provide evidence for such a distribution:
(a) Comparisons of the average benefits the institution bestow on the discriminated
group with the average benefits the institutions bestow on other groups
(b) Comparisons of the proportion of the discriminated group found in the lowest
levels of the institutions with the proportions of other groups found at those levels,
and
(c) Comparisons of the proportions of that group that holds the more advantageous
positions with the proportions of other groups that hold those same positions.
Average Income Comparisons
Income comparisons provide the most suggestive indicators of discrimination. If we
compare the average incomes of non-White American families, with the average
incomes of White American families, we see that White family incomes are
substantially above those of non-Whites.
Lowest Income Group Comparisons
The lowest income group in the United States consists of those people whose annual
income falls below the poverty level. The bottom income groups in the United States
are statistically correlated with race and sex. In comparison with Whites and male-
headed families, larger proportions of minorities and female-headed families are
poor.
Desirable Occupation Comparisons
The evidence of racial and sexual discrimination provided by the quantitative
measures we have so far cited can be filled out qualitatively by examining the
occupational distribution of racial and sexual minorities. In every major occupational
group, larger percentages of White males move into the higher-paying occupations,
while minorities and women end up in those that pay less and so are less desirable.
Discrimination in the United States
• The income gap between Whites and minorities has not decreased
• Large income inequalities based on sex exist
• Overall, Black unemployment is more than twice as high as White unemployment
• Minority poverty rate is 2-3 times White rate
• Poverty rate of families headed by women is 3 times that of male-headed families
• Most higher-paying jobs go to White males
Glass ceiling is an invisible, but impenetrable, barrier to further promotion
sometimes encountered by women or minorities.
Equal employment opportunity commission is a federal agency that investigates
claims of on-the-job sexual harassment and discrimination.
Increasing problems for women and minorities:
• Women and minorities make up most new workers
• Women are steered into low-paying jobs and face a glass ceiling and sexual
harassment
• Minorities need skills and education but lack these
Discrimination: Utility, Rights, and
Justice
The arguments mustered against discrimination generally fall into three groups: (a)
utilitarian arguments, which claim that discrimination leads to an inefficient use of
human resources; (b) rights arguments, which claim that discrimination violates basic
human rights; and (c) justice arguments, which claim that discrimination results in an
unjust distribution of society’s benefits and burdens.
Principle of equality is individuals who are equal in all respects relevant to the kind
of treatment in question should be treated equally even if they are dissimilar in other,
nonrelevant respects.
Arguments against discrimination:
• Utility: discrimination leads to inefficient use of human resources
• Rights: discrimination violates basic human rights
• Justice: discrimination results in unjust distributions of benefits and burdens
Discriminatory Practices
Regardless of the problems inherent in some of the arguments against discrimination, it is clear that there are strong
reasons for holding that discrimination is wrong. Among the practices now widely recognized as discriminatory are the
following:
1. Recruitment Practices
Firms that rely solely on the word-pf-mouth referrals of present employees to recruit new workers tend to recruit
only from those racial and sexual groups that are already represented in their labor force. When a firm’s labor force
is composed of only White males, this recruitment policy will tend to discriminate against minorities and women.

2. Screening Practices
Job qualifications are discriminatory when they are not relevant to the job to be performed.

3. Promotion Practices
Promotion, job progression, and transfer practices are discriminatory when employers place White males on job
tracks separate from those open to women and minorities.
4. Conditions of Employment
Wages and salaries are discriminatory to the extent that equal wages and salaries are not
given to people who are doing essentially the same work.

5. Discharge
Firing an employee on the basis of race or sex is a clear form of discrimination. Less
blatant but still discriminatory are layoff policies that rely on a seniority system, in
which women and minorities have the lowest seniority because of past discrimination.

6. Sexual Harassment
Sexual harassment is under certain conditions, unwelcome sexual advances, requests for
sexual favors, and other verbal or physical contact of a sexual nature.
Beyond Race and Sex: Other Groups
Americans with disabilities act of 1990 is Bars discrimination on the basis of
disability and requires that employers make reasonable accommodation for their
disabled employees and customers.
Besides race and sex, discrimination can be based on:
• Age
• Sexual orientation
• Transsexual status
• Disability
• Obesity
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
To rectify the effects of past discrimination, many employers have instituted
affirmative action programs designed to achieve a more representative distribution of
minorities and women within the firm by giving preference to women and minorities.
Affirmative action programs, in fact, are now legally required of all firms that hold a
government contract. The heart of an affirmative action program is a detailed study (a
“utilization analysis”) of all the major job classifications in the firm. The purpose of
the study is to determine whether there are fewer minorities or women in a particular
job classification than could be reasonably expected by their availability in the area
from which the firm recruits.
Affirmative Action as Compensation
Compensation argument for affirmative action:
• Claims affirmative action compensates groups for past discrimination
• Criticized as unfair because those who benefit were not harmed and those who pay
did not injure
Affirmative Action as an Instrument for
Achieving Utilitarian Goals and Equal Justice
Utilitarian argument for affirmative action:
• Claims affirmative action reduces need and so increases utility
• Criticized on grounds that costs outweigh benefits and that other ways of reducing
need will produce greater utility
Equal justice argument for affirmative action:
• Claims affirmative action will secure equal opportunity
• Claims affirmative action is a morally legitimate means
Arguments made against equal justice argument for affirmative action:
• Affirmative action programs “discriminate” against White men
• Preferential treatment violates the principle of equality
• Affirmative action programs harm women and minorities
Implementing Affirmative Action and
Managing Diversity
The following guidelines have been suggested as a way to fold these sorts of considerations
into an affirmative action program when minorities are underrepresented in a firm:
1. Both minorities and nonminorities should be hired or promoted only if they reach certain
minimum levels of competency or are capable of reaching such levels in a reasonable time.
2. If the qualifications of the minority candidate are only slightly less (or equal to or higher)
than those of the nonminority, then the minority should be given preference
3. If both the minority and nonminority candidates are adequately qualified for a position
but the nonminority candidate is much more qualified, then:
a. If performance in the job directly affects the lives and safety of people (such as a surgeon
or an airline pilot) or if performance on the job has a substantial and critical effect on the
entire firm’s efficiency (such as head comptroller), then the more qualified nonminority
should be given preference; but
b. If the position (like most positions in a firm) does not directly involve safety factors and
does not have a substantial and highly critical effect on a firm’s efficiency, then the
minority person should be given preference.
4. Preference should be extended to minority candidates only so long as their representation
throughout the various levels of the firm is not proportional to their availability.
Comparable Pay for Jobs of
Comparable Worth
Comparable worth program is a program designed to ensure that jobs of equal value
to an organization are paid the same salary regardless of whether external labor
markets pay the same rates for those jobs.
Comparable worth programs:
• Equalize pay for jobs requiring equal responsibilities and equal skills and of equal
value to an organization
• Based on idea that equals should be treated as equals
Conclusions
Earlier sections examined several future trends that will affect the future status of
women and minorities in the workforce. Of particular significance is the fact that
only a small proportion of new workers will be White males. Most new workers will
be women and minorities. Unless major changes are made to accommodate their
needs and special characteristics, they will not be incorporated smoothly into the
workplace.
We have reviewed a number of programs that provide special assistance to women
and minorities on moral grounds. However, it should be clear, in view of the future
demographic trends, that enlightened self-interest should also prompt business to
give women and minorities a special hand. The costs of not assisting the coming
influx of women and minorities with their special needs will not be borne entirely by
women and minorities. Unfortunately, if businesses will not be able to find the
workers they need and they will suffer recurrent and crippling shortages over the next
decade. The pool of traditional White male workers simply will be so small that
businesses will not be able to rely on them to fill all their requirements for skilled and
managerial positions.
Many businesses, aware of these trends, have undertaken programs to prepare
themselves now to respond to the special needs of women and minorities, to respond
to women’s needs, for example, many companies have instituted day-care services
and flexible working hours that allow women with children to care for their
children’s needs. Other companies have instituted aggressive affirmative action
programs aimed at integrating large groups of minorities into their firms where they
are provided with education, job training, skills, counseling, and other assistance
designed to enable them to assimilate into the workforce. The belief of such
companies is that if they act now to recruit women and minorities, they will be
familiar with their special needs and will have a large cadre of women and minorities
capable of bringing other women and minorities along. 
James R. Houghton, chairman of Corning Glass Works, is quoted as saying:
Valuing and managing a diverse work force is more than ethically and morally
correct. It’s also a business necessity. Work force demographics for the next decade
make it absolutely clear that companies which fail to do an excellent job of
recruiting, retaining, developing and promoting women and minorities simply will be
unable to meet their staffing needs.